Wednesday, December 13th 2023

Zhaoxin Launches KX-7000 Desktop 8-Core x86 Processor to Power China's Ambitions

After years of delays, Chinese chipmaker Zhaoxin has finally launched its long-awaited KX-7000 series consumer CPUs, only one of its kind in China, based on the licensed x86-64 ISA. Zhaoxin claims the new 8-core processors based on "Century Avenue" uArch deliver double the performance of previous generations. Leveraging architectural improvements and 4X more cache, the KX-7000 represents essential progress for China's domestic semiconductor industry. While still likely lagging behind rival AMD and Intel chips in raw speed, the KX-7000 matches competitive specs in areas like DDR5 memory, PCIe 4.0, and USB4 support. For Chinese efforts to attain technological independence, closing feature gaps with foreign processors is just as crucial as boosting performance. Manufactured on a 16 nm process, the KX-7000 does not use the best silicon node available.

Other chip details include out-of-order execution (OoOE), 24 PCIe 4.0 lanes, a 32 MB pool of L3 cache and 4 MB L2 cache, a base frequency of 3.2 GHz, and a boost clock of 3.7 GHz. Interestingly, the CPU also has VT-x, BT-d 2.5, SSE4.2/AVX/AVX2 support, most likely also licensed from the x86 makers Intel and/or AMD. Ultimately, surpassing Western processors is secondary for China next to attaining self-reliance. Instructions like SM encryption catering to domestic data protection priorities underscore how the KX-7000 advances strategic autonomy goals. With its x86 architecture license giving software compatibility and now a vastly upgraded platform, the KX-7000 will raise China's chip capabilities even if it is still trailing rivals' speeds. Ongoing progress closing that performance gap could position Zhaoxin as a mainstream alternative for local PC builders and buyers.
Sources: WCCFTech, Zhaoxin
Add your own comment

30 Comments on Zhaoxin Launches KX-7000 Desktop 8-Core x86 Processor to Power China's Ambitions

#26
TumbleGeorge
TheoneandonlyMrKI thought Intel determined Cyrixs X86 licence was Not transferable?!.
Specific architectures and details are patented, there is hardly any patent on ISA as a whole. In addition, IBM has its own developments and contributions. They were respectively used in subsidiary company Sirix and, as a result of transactions, reached VIA and Zhaoxin. Could Intel be messing with IBM's way of doing business? I don't think Intel has a say in this case.
Posted on Reply
#27
TheoneandonlyMrK
TumbleGeorgeSpecific architectures and details are patented, there is hardly any patent on ISA as a whole. In addition, IBM has its own developments and contributions. They were respectively used in subsidiary company Sirix and, as a result of transactions, reached VIA and Zhaoxin. Could Intel be messing with IBM's way of doing business? I don't think Intel has a say in this case.
I actually owned a Cyrix 386, I'm surprised Intel didn't litigate clearly but fair enough.
Posted on Reply
#28
regs
DenverDidn't Intel and AMD have to form a mutual agreement to avoid fighting over patents related to x86-64 between themselves? I don't remember VIA being included in that agreement tbh
Because they weren't. Cyrix had own cross-licensing agreement with Intel.
R-T-BEither way they certainly have at least a license to basic x86 from cyrix->VIA lineage.
Cyrix "basic" implementation was completely home grown, so Intel lost all legal battles. They then signed cross-licensing agreement. And Zaoixin did not buy license itself, but a stake in a company owning the license and IP. As far as I remember it's over 50%.
Posted on Reply
#29
Denver
regsBecause they weren't. Cyrix had own cross-licensing agreement with Intel.


Cyrix "basic" implementation was completely home grown, so Intel lost all legal battles. They then signed cross-licensing agreement.
Intel is only 50% of the equation. AMD is the other party, and I suspect they have no reason to agree on this.
Posted on Reply
#30
regs
DenverIntel is only 50% of the equation. AMD is the other party, and I suspect they have no reason to agree on this.
It's more than 50%. It's also MMX, SSE, AVX, VT-x etc. VIA have been making x86-64 CPUs since 2011. So either some old agreement with AMD or cross-licensing conditions covers it as well. They could also implement it own way, like x86.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 16th, 2024 20:23 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts